Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Sep 14, 2005 11:47pm
Forum: forums Subject: Re: Serious discussion?

liability we might face in aggressively removing every file that may contain copyrighted material. (Yes, we may be sued if we *remove* certain materials.

Hi JD, thanks for the informative reply! Wow, the ramifications of the DMCA are much crazier than I realized. :P

I can point you to many similar grassroots media sites where they have no moderators or procedure for removing such material. So please cut our volunteer moderators some slack.

I'd definitely like to make it as smooth as possible for the moderators! Can you summarize the most efficient way for us "concerned users" to work with them using the procedures you have?

This morning I see a bunch of replies to various reports I submitted yesterday, regarding commercial video or audio material (either combined, or straight clips or say, TV theme songs or song rips from popular albums). First time I've gotten so much feedback! Here is a sample of responses:

Re whether to use the "report abuse" or "deletion request" forms: "The abuse form is the most appropriate method to communicate such media items to us. They are stored in a different queue and are looked at by a different group of volunteers." So that's clear from now on.

But then, which items shall we continue to report?

Various responses to my individual reports:
"Items such as this, a "mash-up" of materials, may be permitted by Fair Use guidelines. It is our policy to allow items similar to remain on Ourmedia unless a copyright owner requests they be removed."

"We have looked into this users content and taken appropriate actions."

"We have started a review of content posted by this user."

"We will review this users content."

So extrapolating from the responses: If we see a combination of commercial audio/video, should we not bother to report, or 2 popular songs combined, should we not report, but if they are "straight" rips of the primary audio or video from a DVD or CD, we should?

And when we receive a complaint from a copyright owner, we immediately remove the file.

So would it help for us to be pinging the copyright owners to contact Ourmedia? In one recent example, archive users looking for Jason Mraz concerts at the Live Music Archive here through the search engine *also* pulled up a rip of Jason's latest album. Fans apparently talked about it on the artist's messageboard. Would it have been more efficient to explain to Mraz's management there on the board how to request deletion, or for a concerned fan just to report abuse to Ourmedia?

Then, would the situation have been different had Jason's album been presented as a user-generated soundtrack to an anime episode?

We have a Community Watch page where we report the results of violations of our Site Rules. So you can see the kinds of materials we've been removing over the months:

On that page, are those just selected/representative examples, or is it the complete list of removals?

Thanks again for taking the time to straighten us out on all this- sure is rough terrain!

This post was modified by Diana Hamilton on 2005-09-15 06:47:15

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: J.B. Nicholson-Owens Date: Oct 2, 2005 3:31am
Forum: forums Subject: Why bother finding and reporting copyright infringements?

"I'd definitely like to make it as smooth as possible for the moderators! Can you summarize the most efficient way for us "concerned users" to work with them using the procedures you have?"

I'm stuck on a more basic question: why should anyone want to find and report infringing works?

Talking about the mechanics of doing this job without first covering whether the job should be done at all seems to me to put the cart before the horse.

I read the Community Watch page ( but I didn't see anything explain why moderation or policing should be done. It just says that Ourmedia depends on volunteers, members, and users to do it and that by doing the job they will help "protect [their] community". There's a bit about whether it's possible to do community policing, but the "vested interest in policing itself" goes unjustified; the text doesn't say what the community will be protected from, particularly in the context of coming across material that infringes upon someone's copyright.

According to the grandparent post, finding and reporting copyright infringements is hard to do correctly, the number of infringing entries currently hosted on is low, and is in no danger of going away as a result of spending money fighting legal battles. Maybe I'm missing something, but those seem like strong disincentives to anyone putting any effort into finding and reporting copyright infringements, even in instances where the infringement is clear to the layperson (like ripped and encoded tracks from major studio CDs).

Thanks for your time.